Agree with Bootie. Hopefully, there is a solid tactical game at the core.
L
Luke Hughes
Guest
@Meat Grinder and @Bootie while BoC is a game about leadership for me personally the core is the tactical game. Damn it Jim I'm a wargamer not a writer ;-)
So Luke, if this game is about leadership, then you issue a command to squad, platoon and what happens. I think everyone here understands the rudiments of small unit tactics, so in your game do you tell your guys what you want done or do you plot what you want done? Command is about executing doctrine applied to the conditions, not micromanaging every soldier. So if I tell my SGT to take a squad and flank a MG while me and the other squads lay down suppression fire, do my troops follow my commands? I get they might get stressed and go to ground thru lAck of experience, mitigating factors, but do I have to plot the route details, etc? Mechanics question I guess...
Whereas initiative is modifying doctrine to overcome the prevailing conditions...
L
Luke Hughes
Guest
Real leadership is as you describe @HOA_KSOP but it is very tricky taking agency away from a player in a game. In this game leaders activate units but you must still move the units (pick their path). Very tempting to go the way of realistic simulation (tell them what to do and leave it to them) but I am resisting it. There, an answer you didn't want 
Hopefully increasing my honesty score.
If it makes you feel better units can definitely not do what you ask. Check out Band of Brothers board game for a feel on this. In fact as suppression goes up friction goes up with it and you will quickly start to lose control of your troops unless you manage their morale
Luke
p.s. here's a recent writeup on Band of Brothers and command friction (but it's rather lengthy): http://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/band-of-brothers-infantry-primer.html
A more succinct if somewhat abstract version from the designer himself Jim Krohn. I subscribe to a lot of his views:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/72928/why-band-brothers
Read the above if you just want to cut to the chase.
p.p.s. the AI to surrender control would be very tricky to (hats off here to Panther games:Command Ops) but my primary reason remains keeping the average player (including me) engaged by direct agency in this "crossover" game (read not just for grognards). Games like Victoria II that take over too much agency can alienate players (including me) while doing a fine simulation job.
Hopefully increasing my honesty score.If it makes you feel better units can definitely not do what you ask. Check out Band of Brothers board game for a feel on this. In fact as suppression goes up friction goes up with it and you will quickly start to lose control of your troops unless you manage their morale
Luke
p.s. here's a recent writeup on Band of Brothers and command friction (but it's rather lengthy): http://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/band-of-brothers-infantry-primer.html
A more succinct if somewhat abstract version from the designer himself Jim Krohn. I subscribe to a lot of his views:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/72928/why-band-brothers
Read the above if you just want to cut to the chase.
p.p.s. the AI to surrender control would be very tricky to (hats off here to Panther games:Command Ops) but my primary reason remains keeping the average player (including me) engaged by direct agency in this "crossover" game (read not just for grognards). Games like Victoria II that take over too much agency can alienate players (including me) while doing a fine simulation job.
Last edited by a moderator:
Luke, interesting. Thanks for the preview. So if I plot a squads path, what dictates their responses, reactions? Morale, stress, experience, training, initiative or a combination of all, plus the physical environment of course. I guess plotting a squad's movement is no different than pointing it out with gestures or plotting it on a map or sand table. So I get what you are trying to do. There are a couple of titles I have that pull this off pretty well...but don't have the leader characteristic level of course. So it's not a deal breaker for me good sir...Real leadership is as you describe @HOA_KSOP but it is very tricky taking agency away from a player. In this game leaders activate units but you must still move the units (pick their path). Very tempting to go the way of realistic simulation (tell them what to do and leave it to them) but I am resisting it. There, an answer you didn't want
If it makes you feel better units can definitely not do what you ask. Check out Band of Brothers board game for a feel on this. In fact as suppression goes up friction goes up with it and you will quickly start to lose control of your troops unless you manage their morale
Luke
p.s. here's a recent writeup on Band of Brothers and command friction: http://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/band-of-brothers-infantry-primer.html
L
Luke Hughes
Guest
@meat_grinder -- great scene. I have to watch that movie again. Definite a certain kind of leadership style there too LOL
@HOA_KSOP -- a units willingness to respond meaningfully to orders is based on: morale. Morale = base morale + experience + leadership influence (a mix of Trust and Respect (<- ldr experience)) - suppression - casualties - stress plus special factors from narrative or *maybe* attentional: fixation, facing (is a threat in its FOV etc), . Haven't decided if cover changes morale. Probably.
There you subtle @#$@# you wormed more than I wanted to give out of me. LOL. BUT IT'S ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE YOU WILEY @#$@. In fact maybe I'm just leading you on @HOA_KSOP??? muh huh huh. Morale is actually about how many pretty ponies you've accumulated by grinding.
Which titles are you referring to BTW? I want to steal all their ideas LOL.
p.s. plotting as 'sandtable' or pointing with gesture. I like it. I think I'll position that way from now on
@HOA_KSOP -- a units willingness to respond meaningfully to orders is based on: morale. Morale = base morale + experience + leadership influence (a mix of Trust and Respect (<- ldr experience)) - suppression - casualties - stress plus special factors from narrative or *maybe* attentional: fixation, facing (is a threat in its FOV etc), . Haven't decided if cover changes morale. Probably.
There you subtle @#$@# you wormed more than I wanted to give out of me. LOL. BUT IT'S ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE YOU WILEY @#$@. In fact maybe I'm just leading you on @HOA_KSOP??? muh huh huh. Morale is actually about how many pretty ponies you've accumulated by grinding.
Which titles are you referring to BTW? I want to steal all their ideas LOL.
p.s. plotting as 'sandtable' or pointing with gesture. I like it. I think I'll position that way from now on
Last edited by a moderator:
Any chance that, under extreme duress, a unit will go "fanatic" and ignore all danger? I think this was in the Squad Leader boardgame.
L
Luke Hughes
Guest
@meatgrinder Ha yes that was called "berserk" if I recall. Nice example. While not in BoC yet it is an example of a random event (but triggered in a sensible context like being fired on) and one of a psychological nature (duh). It is the kind of event we want in. The virtue of such random events from a design standpoint is that they create stories ("so I was losing the scenario when...."). And realistic "chaos." The downside is of course you are giving up some control. But war is not chess
Like, thanks for spilling more beans than you wanted to. Three second rule, we are lapping them up!@meat_grinder -- great scene. I have to watch that movie again. Definite a certain kind of leadership style there too LOL
@HOA_KSOP -- a units willingness to respond meaningfully to orders is based on: morale. Morale = base morale + experience + leadership influence (a mix of Trust and Respect (<- ldr experience)) - suppression - casualties - stress plus special factors from narrative or *maybe* attentional: fixation, facing (is a threat in its FOV etc), . Haven't decided if cover changes morale. Probably.
There you subtle @#$@# you wormed more than I wanted to give out of me. LOL. BUT IT'S ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE YOU WILEY @#$@. In fact maybe I'm just leading you on @HOA_KSOP??? muh huh huh. Morale is actually about how many pretty ponies you've accumulated by grinding.
Which titles are you referring to BTW? I want to steal all their ideas LOL.
p.s. plotting as 'sandtable' or pointing with gesture. I like it. I think I'll position that way from now on
Titles I am referring to would be PCO and Graviteam games. Basically you issue orders, pick an objective and set your subalterns on their way. In the Graviteam games orders are issued on an operational map, battles are resolved real time, although you can pause and issue orders, but there is lag and units don't always receive or execute orders. Not sure but morale plus battle factors impact units performance. PCO is turn based and you can play with a reaction phase that allows you narrow latitude to change unit orders with in the constraints of the original order. I am sure morale, the unit's "SOP" and the conditions impact how unit performs. I have not played more recent CM titles so you will have to ask other FGM'ers how morale impacts units. Check out the PCO manual, it goes into depth about modifiers. Also ask Mad Russian, he would know I bet. I have already told several about "Bust Out Command" skills game.
Regards HOA_KSOP
Last edited:
Not to mention unit experience, supply, etc....
The flip side would be overwhelming hopelessness and mass surrender...@meatgrinder Ha yes that was called "berserk" if I recall. Nice example. While not in BoC yet it is an example of a random event (but triggered in a sensible context like being fired on) and one of a psychological nature (duh). It is the kind of event we want in. The virtue of such random events from a design standpoint is that they create stories ("so I was losing the scenario when...."). And realistic "chaos." The downside is of course you are giving up some control. But war is not chess
Now you're talking about how I feel on work days.
@meatgrinder Ha yes that was called "berserk" if I recall. Nice example. While not in BoC yet it is an example of a random event (but triggered in a sensible context like being fired on) and one of a psychological nature (duh). It is the kind of event we want in. The virtue of such random events from a design standpoint is that they create stories ("so I was losing the scenario when...."). And realistic "chaos." The downside is of course you are giving up some control. But war is not chess
Bit like Wild Bill Guarnere going gung ho on the Germans on the road in BoB.
So in the game how would. You model this situation. There was a study done about Ww2 combat and I thought I read the statistic that like only 3 out of 10 riflemen were "active" participants in combat, 6 of ten were there, but wouldn't take what they considered undue risk and 1 out of ten would just stay under cover and wouldn't shoot their weapon. These are averages and probably vary depending on nationality. Ever hear of this report?@meatgrinder Ha yes that was called "berserk" if I recall. Nice example. While not in BoC yet it is an example of a random event (but triggered in a sensible context like being fired on) and one of a psychological nature (duh). It is the kind of event we want in. The virtue of such random events from a design standpoint is that they create stories ("so I was losing the scenario when...."). And realistic "chaos." The downside is of course you are giving up some control. But war is not chess
Killology report....
The original Ww2 report in combat psychology was done by S.L.A. Marshall and his results have come into question. More modern studies have yielded the "Killology" term and report...